LouCifer Posted October 28, 2017 Report Share Posted October 28, 2017 1 minute ago, jjgallow said: The difference being that Hamilton was barely 20 years old and was a known potential star in this league. And we...basically.....may have paid less for Hamiltion in a lesser draft with a lower pick. If Hamonic could become 7 years younger, show super-star potential instead of second-line potential, and lower his salary to league minimum, and if our draft pick wasn't currently a pro-rated top 10, and if 2018 wasn't an Extremely strong draft year, I would be totally cool with this trade. I understand your concern JJ. It isn't an apples to apples comparison for Hamilton and Hamonic. I know where we currently sit in the standings is concerning, but I'm just going to give it some more time before I say the trade wasn't worth it. I hope we see some improvement sooner than later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted October 28, 2017 Report Share Posted October 28, 2017 9 minutes ago, jjgallow said: Oh my I was unaware....... So like this, then? You have this on your wall ? OK good start Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted October 28, 2017 Report Share Posted October 28, 2017 2 hours ago, jjgallow said: The difference being that Hamilton was barely 20 years old and was a known potential star in this league. And we...basically.....may have paid less for Hamiltion in a lesser draft with a lower pick. If Hamonic could become 7 years younger, show super-star potential instead of second-line potential, and lower his salary to league minimum, and if our draft pick wasn't currently a pro-rated top 10, and if 2018 wasn't an Extremely strong draft year, I would be totally cool with this trade. To qualify that a bit, he's playing more minutes than Dougie. Reverse the top 2 RD and see what the results look like. Dougie worked out (after a long stretch of bad results) with Gio. Hamonic has not looked anywhere that bad to start on this team. Brodie isn't helping right now. I understand your want for shiny new toys, but sometimes the best ones are the ones that have been around for awhile. Would you complain about Shea Weber? Old guy. It's not like we traded for Bieksa. We paid market price for a stay at home D-man that has played in the top 2. You want a bonafide top 1 player? Draft picks isn't going to cut it. Think Tkachuk, a 1st and a prospect. Probably more like Tkchuk and Brodie. If we are a top 10 pick, then we have bigger problems. Projected? What is that supposed to mean. Arizona is projected to not win a single game. VGK is the projected Presidents' Cup winner. Oilers are projected 4th or worse in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted October 28, 2017 Report Share Posted October 28, 2017 32 minutes ago, travel_dude said: I understand your want for shiny new toys, but sometimes the best ones are the ones that have been around for awhile. Lame. For the right price, you're right. We could have had any number of equally good stay at home vets without giving any thing up. Beauchemin, etc.... All you need to do is read the posts I already posted. We're starting to go in circles already, so I guess we'll see. But if we hand over a top 10 pick, that will be our biggest problem. People won't say "oh, we didn't see this coming". We just think that now, God bless our hearts. When the math is done, people will wonder how we didn't identify the risk before we started handing out all our picks. We're stringing all our hopes on a 92 year old goalie and all that needs to do is unravel, or if we actually have Any real injury...ever...and that's it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted October 28, 2017 Report Share Posted October 28, 2017 3 hours ago, jjgallow said: The difference being that Hamilton was barely 20 years old and was a known potential star in this league. And we...basically.....may have paid less for Hamiltion in a lesser draft with a lower pick. If Hamonic could become 7 years younger, show super-star potential instead of second-line potential, and lower his salary to league minimum, and if our draft pick wasn't currently a pro-rated top 10, and if 2018 wasn't an Extremely strong draft year, I would be totally cool with this trade. Isn't that what we call an oxymoron? With Hamilton we got the potential probably offensive minded defenseman. With Hamonic we got the known (a top 4 defensive defenseman). Total opposites. We paid about the same price for both (since in different years not all draft picks are equal). Hamonic plays @ about 2/3s of the cap hit & has allowed Brodie to assume a more offensive role while Hamiton remains @ roughly status quo. It depends what you expect. Hamonic is that steady guy while Hamilton is still all over the map. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted October 28, 2017 Report Share Posted October 28, 2017 35 minutes ago, jjgallow said: Lame. For the right price, you're right. We could have had any number of equally good stay at home vets without giving any thing up. Beauchemin, etc.... All you need to do is read the posts I already posted. We're starting to go in circles already, so I guess we'll see. But if we hand over a top 10 pick, that will be our biggest problem. People won't say "oh, we didn't see this coming". We just think that now, God bless our hearts. When the math is done, people will wonder how we didn't identify the risk before we started handing out all our picks. We're stringing all our hopes on a 92 year old goalie and all that needs to do is unravel, or if we actually have Any real injury...ever...and that's it. I'm glad you did the math. Hall for Larsson was seen as a huge overpay. Weber for PK. Jones for Johansen. Yet we can get these guys for nothing but salary. Awesome. Who are they again? Beauchemin. Engelland. Scott Hannan? How about somebody in their 20's. I know your frustration about missing out on #1 overall picks. Beauts like Hall, Nuge, Yak. In a year with Matthews and Laine, we couldn't even muster a top 2 pick. We get stuck with Tkachuk. When the math is done, and the players that we missed out on are nothing more than we already have, and that Hamonic is a better player than you imagined, you will forget this post. If you happen to be right, we will all come and praise you for knowing the sky was falling. Perhaps we should play another month before we give up on the season. Bottom 10 is very unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted October 28, 2017 Report Share Posted October 28, 2017 3 minutes ago, travel_dude said: I'm glad you did the math. Hall for Larsson was seen as a huge overpay. Weber for PK. Jones for Johansen. Yet we can get these guys for nothing but salary. Awesome. Who are they again? Beauchemin. Engelland. Scott Hannan? How about somebody in their 20's. I know your frustration about missing out on #1 overall picks. Beauts like Hall, Nuge, Yak. In a year with Matthews and Laine, we couldn't even muster a top 2 pick. We get stuck with Tkachuk. When the math is done, and the players that we missed out on are nothing more than we already have, and that Hamonic is a better player than you imagined, you will forget this post. If you happen to be right, we will all come and praise you for knowing the sky was falling. Perhaps we should play another month before we give up on the season. Bottom 10 is very unlikely. dude you're all over the place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted October 28, 2017 Report Share Posted October 28, 2017 45 minutes ago, Flyerfan52 said: Isn't that what we call an oxymoron? With Hamilton we got the potential probably offensive minded defenseman. With Hamonic we got the known (a top 4 defensive defenseman). Total opposites. We paid about the same price for both (since in different years not all draft picks are equal). Hamonic plays @ about 2/3s of the cap hit & has allowed Brodie to assume a more offensive role while Hamiton remains @ roughly status quo. It depends what you expect. Hamonic is that steady guy while Hamilton is still all over the map. Do I like Hamilton's game better than Hamilton's at this point? Yes. For that matter I would happily assemble an NHL team with 4 Robyn Regehrs if I could. But that's first line defence. Mythical these days. Offense and those skills have always come with a premium. And we know, with the right environment an willingness, Hamilton can learn the rest. And we've seen some progress there although I question the environment part. I just think there were and still are much more sensible ways of improving defensively. Starting with coaching. But top defensive teams.....rarely pay for top defense. They make it, and acquire it, every year. Top defensive D last longer....I would have happily taken one or more of the free agents in their mid 30's. Or picked up someone from the SHL or KHL. We try that stuff and we get Pribyl and Cervenka. So I can understand the issue. But other teams are doing it and it's working. Maybe instead of giving up first round picks we could have looked at what those teams are doing who are getting good defense and NOT giving up first round picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted October 28, 2017 Report Share Posted October 28, 2017 24 minutes ago, jjgallow said: Do I like Hamilton's game better than Hamilton's at this point? Yes. For that matter I would happily assemble an NHL team with 4 Robyn Regehrs if I could. But that's first line defence. Mythical these days. Offense and those skills have always come with a premium. And we know, with the right environment an willingness, Hamilton can learn the rest. And we've seen some progress there although I question the environment part. I just think there were and still are much more sensible ways of improving defensively. Starting with coaching. But top defensive teams.....rarely pay for top defense. They make it, and acquire it, every year. Top defensive D last longer....I would have happily taken one or more of the free agents in their mid 30's. Or picked up someone from the SHL or KHL. We try that stuff and we get Pribyl and Cervenka. So I can understand the issue. But other teams are doing it and it's working. Maybe instead of giving up first round picks we could have looked at what those teams are doing who are getting good defense and NOT giving up first round picks. I would love to see some samples of these defensemen that other teams are picking up that are top 4 coming over from Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted October 28, 2017 Report Share Posted October 28, 2017 54 minutes ago, jjgallow said: dude you're all over the place. You talk about how easy it is to get better players. You talk about this draft being can't miss. You talk about the Flames mathematically being a top 10 pick that we traded away. All of that is possible, but so is the opposite. Sorry if disagreeing is being all over the place. You are most days like Elliot Friedman. 31 Thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 47 minutes ago, MAC331 said: I would love to see some samples of these defensemen that other teams are picking up that are top 4 coming over from Europe. I think we could have managed a Jan Rutta just fine here. Perhaps a little better as he has the offense down too. Chicago was in a similar predicament. There's more like him out there if your team decides it's more focused on hockey than it is politics and arena construction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 27 minutes ago, travel_dude said: You talk about how easy it is to get better players. I never said that ever, once, on here. It's vastly more research and work than trading away all your picks. It requires a more vast and trusted scouting network, it requires a management team that knows what to do with their information, and knows where they need scouts. It requires good businessmen who can strike deals with players and agents when they're already making decent money on other continents. It's actual management of the organisation, the team, and its future. Instead of free rides for goalie coaches, and utilizing all your resources on politics and arenas. Quote You talk about this draft being can't miss. Never said that once, anywhere, you made it up in your head. Which gets annoying after a while. Quote You talk about the Flames mathematically being a top 10 pick that we traded away. Cause they currently are. You insert math in phrases as if it is a very bad thing. Not so. That's how the top 10 are determined. Math. And I don't have to be "right" about the Flames ending up there. The fact that they would take the risk at all is the problem. It's the complete lack of risk management in their moves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowtownguy Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 13 minutes ago, jjgallow said: It's actual management of the organisation, the team, and its future. Instead of free rides for goalie coaches, and utilizing all your resources on politics and arenas. Minor quibble JJ. I don't think that they put significant resources into politics and the new arena. I do remember that I put a lot of effort into my grade 6 science project though. ETA: I do believe that you have some points regarding trades. We have given up a lot of picks paying top dollar for players who still need to raise their level of play. Gio is still out best defenceman, Brodie needs to make better decisions, Hamonic needs to get used to passing to the red jerseys, and Hamilton needs to realize that he is tall enough to reach the cookie jar on the counter. I am not sure why the development is taking this long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 1 hour ago, jjgallow said: Do I like Hamilton's game better than Hamilton's at this point? Yes. For that matter I would happily assemble an NHL team with 4 Robyn Regehrs if I could. But that's first line defence. Mythical these days. Offense and those skills have always come with a premium. And we know, with the right environment an willingness, Hamilton can learn the rest. And we've seen some progress there although I question the environment part. I just think there were and still are much more sensible ways of improving defensively. Starting with coaching. But top defensive teams.....rarely pay for top defense. They make it, and acquire it, every year. Top defensive D last longer....I would have happily taken one or more of the free agents in their mid 30's. Or picked up someone from the SHL or KHL. We try that stuff and we get Pribyl and Cervenka. So I can understand the issue. But other teams are doing it and it's working. Maybe instead of giving up first round picks we could have looked at what those teams are doing who are getting good defense and NOT giving up first round picks. Top D are developed somewhere but yet top end D win SCs elsewhere. Anaheim traded for Pronger (pretty heavy cost including 2 1st rounders) & Niedermayer as UFA. Chicago did develop Keith & Seabrook and keep them & Nashville grew their D internally but there are possibilities each way. As far as Hamonic & Hamilton we got 2 top 4 defense for assets that we'd be lucky if even 1 grows into that role. Dahlin might well become a great D but this early we are not in the lottery & certainly didn't win it so odds of getting him are slim. As far as Robyn Regehr we didn't draft him. After deliberating the Flames wisely selected him from an available list as part of the return for Theo Fleury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 16 hours ago, jjgallow said: I think we could have managed a Jan Rutta just fine here. Perhaps a little better as he has the offense down too. Chicago was in a similar predicament. There's more like him out there if your team decides it's more focused on hockey than it is politics and arena construction. Rutta made his choice and correct me if I am wrong but I believe BT was in on him. Hamonic is a proven player with top 4 credentials which this team needed now to improve this team. This is what should matter not some unknown 3 years down the road, lots can happen between now and then. We have on defense alone 2 good RHSD coming soon and on the LHSD we have 3 or 4 good prospects. On the forward front we have number of young core players now and only a few holes of concern coming up over the next few years. I have to think this current position entered into BT's thinking when using the picks he did on certain deals. I think we should be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 16 hours ago, jjgallow said: Cause they currently are. You insert math in phrases as if it is a very bad thing. Not so. That's how the top 10 are determined. Math. And I don't have to be "right" about the Flames ending up there. The fact that they would take the risk at all is the problem. It's the complete lack of risk management in their moves. My only point about the math is that is doesn't factor in anything else. Phillips is on track for something like 144 points. There is a much greater chance of him never reaching that number than getting there. A guy that scores two point in the first game of the season is on track for scoring 164 points. Last year the Flames were on track for a lottery pick. There's risk in every move you make and don't make. Maybe you could have added lotto protection, but maybe that kills the deal. But the bottom line is that if you don't like the player, you will never like the deal. We lose out on some player in a future draft. We get a player that can help us now and until 2020. If we are a lotto team, then we have bigger problems than Hamonic or the deal we made. I'm not going to try to convince you Hamonic is a good player or that we paid market price for a RHS d-man of his calibre. We'll have to let the results speak for themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 17 hours ago, Flyerfan52 said: Top D are developed somewhere but yet top end D win SCs elsewhere. Anaheim traded for Pronger (pretty heavy cost including 2 1st rounders) & Niedermayer as UFA. Chicago did develop Keith & Seabrook and keep them & Nashville grew their D internally but there are possibilities each way. As far as Hamonic & Hamilton we got 2 top 4 defense for assets that we'd be lucky if even 1 grows into that role. Dahlin might well become a great D but this early we are not in the lottery & certainly didn't win it so odds of getting him are slim. As far as Robyn Regehr we didn't draft him. After deliberating the Flames wisely selected him from an available list as part of the return for Theo Fleury. Good points. True about Robyn....I would say that we developed him although in some ways he came to us like the monster her was. What I will say about those teams you mentioned, is that they were all clear contenders Before they made those trades. They already had defensive defensemen, mostly home-grown, that were "Hamonic-like". They needed a push over the edge to win the cup. And even then, they were thinking a lot bigger than Hamonic. They went for cornerstones. So sure, they paid more. Pronger was easily worth 2 first rounders, especially to the right team. I have no issue with that and if the Flames were in that situation, I'd be first in line asking for that kind of trade. But we're not in that position. And, we haven't been since 1988. Some would say 2006, I would disagree to be honest. It's one thing when you're already a contender and you need one more franchise player to win the big one. It's another, when you barely made the playoffs, got smoked, and use up your future to fill holes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 7 minutes ago, jjgallow said: Good points. True about Robyn....I would say that we developed him although in some ways he came to us like the monster her was. What I will say about those teams you mentioned, is that they were all clear contenders Before they made those trades. They already had defensive defensemen, mostly home-grown, that were "Hamonic-like". They needed a push over the edge to win the cup. And even then, they were thinking a lot bigger than Hamonic. They went for cornerstones. So sure, they paid more. Pronger was easily worth 2 first rounders, especially to the right team. I have no issue with that and if the Flames were in that situation, I'd be first in line asking for that kind of trade. But we're not in that position. And, we haven't been since 1988. Some would say 2006, I would disagree to be honest. It's one thing when you're already a contender and you need one more franchise player to win the big one. It's another, when you barely made the playoffs, got smoked, and use up your future to fill holes. You throw around words like "franchise" player like there are trades for these types all the time. Most times good trades come out of no where or because of cap situations and as a GM you have to make a call on whether the player helps you now and long term. I think Hamonic will be with us contributing for some time which in lines his value to us. I read your posts and see a recurring theme of waiting, waiting for the right moment or get a filler at a low cost so we can take a chance on some deal in the future. I don't see where your formula progressively gets this team anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 On 2017-10-28 at 10:44 AM, jjgallow said: You did? That's not what I recall, I thought you liked the Hamonic trade. But, I am getting older. And you have always honorably defended even the trades you didn't like....me not so much I liked, and still do like, the player but no I didn't like the trade. I thought they gave up too much for where their team was and I thought then targetted the wrong type of player. I'm not usually a fan of trading so many top 60 picks as it is but if they were going to it had to he a scorer not a 2nd paring Dman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob74 Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 21 hours ago, jjgallow said: I think we could have managed a Jan Rutta just fine here. Perhaps a little better as he has the offense down too. Chicago was in a similar predicament. There's more like him out there if your team decides it's more focused on hockey than it is politics and arena construction. Or. The Russian D the leafs got last year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 6 minutes ago, robrob74 said: Or. The Russian D the leafs got last year? I think as we get into the season more most of us will be fine with the defensemen we have now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob74 Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 Just now, MAC331 said: I think as we get into the season more most of us will be fine with the defensemen we have now. I just wish we would be successful at finding our own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 5 minutes ago, robrob74 said: I just wish we would be successful at finding our own. Sure but I don't think you take a pass if another GM makes a player such as Hamonic available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob74 Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 2 minutes ago, MAC331 said: Sure but I don't think you take a pass if another GM makes a player such as Hamonic available. I don’t mind the trade, it’s just hard when we’ve already given up so many picks. Therefore it’s not the particular trade itself as much as the others that have to be considered along side it. Which in the end, those other trades are what makes it better or meaningful to have found other players elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted October 29, 2017 Report Share Posted October 29, 2017 34 minutes ago, robrob74 said: I don’t mind the trade, it’s just hard when we’ve already given up so many picks. Therefore it’s not the particular trade itself as much as the others that have to be considered along side it. Which in the end, those other trades are what makes it better or meaningful to have found other players elsewhere. Time will tell but I think these moves with Smith, Hamonic, Hamilton , Jagr and Versteeg sets up a transition to our pipeline in an orderly fashion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.